WASHINGTON — When Mike Johnson won the gavel last fall, many House Republicans hailed the soft-spoken Louisianan as a unifier who might calm a fractured conference. Less than a year later, some of the sharpest turbulence he faces is coming from within his own ranks — specifically, from Republican women who say they are tired of being sidelined.

What began as private grumbling has crystallized into something more public: procedural end-runs around the Speaker, pointed criticism on TV and in print, and a growing list of GOP women heading for the exits or eyeing other offices. Taken together, it amounts to a quiet revolt that’s testing Johnson’s grip on a razor-thin majority and raising questions about the party’s future image.

A petition, a pressure point — and a warning shot

One of the clearest signs came this week when Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida launched a discharge petition to force a vote on banning individual stock trading by members of Congress. Discharge petitions are blunt instruments; they are used when rank-and-file lawmakers conclude that leadership has no intention of moving a bill.

Johnson has said he prefers to run major issues through the committee process, and the House Administration Committee has in fact started looking at the topic. But Luna made it clear she was done waiting. She has said publicly she is frustrated that a reform with broad bipartisan appeal keeps getting pushed aside.

Normally, a freshman going around the Speaker would be notable on its own. What made Luna’s move more significant was who quickly joined her: Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, the conference chair and the only woman in the elected House Republican leadership.

Stefanik’s signature on the petition was itself a statement — but she went further. In a separate dispute over a provision in the annual defense authorization bill, she publicly contradicted Johnson’s explanation of how an intelligence-related measure had been handled, suggesting he had misrepresented events. Allies on both sides later worked to tamp down the clash, but the episode left the impression of open friction between the Speaker and his top woman in leadership.

Asked in the Capitol about the criticism from Stefanik and others, Johnson tried to project calm.

“There’s 220 or so people in this conference and lots of different opinions,” he told reporters. “Everybody’s not delighted with every decision every day, but that’s Congress.”

But behind the scenes, several Republican women describe a deeper frustration that goes beyond any single vote.

“We aren’t taken seriously”

Multiple GOP women say they feel boxed out on key decisions and passed over for roles they believe they’ve earned. Because those complaints involve internal party dynamics — and because relationships with leadership can determine fundraising, committee assignments, and legislative visibility — most are reluctant to speak publicly.

Two House Republican women, however, have described their concerns privately in recent days. They say they see a pattern: When big decisions are made, they’re often made by a small, mostly male circle.

“It’s a sea change — for the worse,” one said, arguing that the atmosphere has shifted under Johnson compared with earlier in the Congress. “I’m concerned there will be fewer Republicans in Congress, period, next year. And certainly, that means there will be fewer Republican women.”

The second was even more blunt: “We aren’t taken seriously. You have women who are very accomplished, very successful, who have earned the merit, who aren’t given the time of day.”

Both women emphasized that the problem isn’t just about symbolism or ego; it’s about power and priorities. If women are underrepresented around the decision-making table, they argue, issues they care about — from party messaging to committee oversight choices — are less likely to get traction.

Exits, ambitions and a shrinking bench

The tensions come at a moment when a noticeable number of high-profile GOP women are reconsidering their future in the House. Some are running for higher office, some are retiring, and a few are openly weighing leaving earlier than planned.

That churn is not unique to women; a broader wave of retirements is hitting both parties. But because Republican women still make up a relatively small portion of the conference, losses among them are more glaring. Fewer women incumbents means fewer senior women in line for gavels, leadership posts, and key negotiating roles.

One member noted that in an entire House Republican conference of more than 210 lawmakers, only one full committee is chaired by a woman: the Rules Committee, led by Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina. Foxx, 83, is widely respected on the right for her conservative record and tough management style. But her leadership is also a reminder of how few women have made it through the seniority bottleneck.

The rest of the power structure remains overwhelmingly male. Subcommittee gavels are scarce; seats at leadership meetings are even rarer. That imbalance has some women quietly asking whether the path upward is really open to them — or whether it’s easier to seek a Senate seat, a governor’s office, or a private-sector role.

Greene, Mace and the language of “marginalized”

If Luna and Stefanik embody procedural and institutional defiance, others are voicing the emotional dimension more explicitly.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who has had a tumultuous relationship with GOP leaders, recently announced she would leave the House at the end of the term to “take the fight” in new directions. According to those familiar with the Speaker’s office, her decision blindsided Johnson’s team.

Greene has said in interviews that she believes Republican women have been “marginalized” by the current leadership structure. While her rhetoric is often more combative than that of her colleagues, the underlying complaint — that female members are not treated as equal partners — echoes what other GOP women say in private.

Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, another frequent critic of party leaders, has voiced similar frustration on a variety of issues this year. Those close to Mace say she has grown weary of what she sees as a dismissive attitude toward women who don’t fit neatly into the old party mold.

Greene and Mace are now reportedly planning a conversation to discuss their shared concerns — an unusual alliance between two women who otherwise differ significantly in style, district and policy emphasis. For Johnson, any joint effort by outspoken figures like Greene and Mace would be another signal that the grievances are not confined to moderates or hard-liners, but cut across factional lines.

Johnson’s defense: support and recruitment

Johnson’s allies say the criticism is overstated and misses key facts. They note that Johnson himself elevated Foxx to the powerful Rules Committee, making her the only Republican woman to hold a full committee gavel this Congress. They also point out that he has placed three GOP women on the Intelligence Committee, including Stefanik, who now serves there while also holding the conference chair position.

A spokesman for the Speaker’s political operation points to something else: money and recruitment.

“Not only has Speaker Johnson elevated women in leadership, he has also helped recruit and support women running for office,” the spokesman said in a recent statement, emphasizing that several women in key battleground districts sit on Johnson’s joint fundraising committee and have already received hundreds of thousands of dollars for their campaigns.

“This cycle, we have women running in 10 of the top districts we are watching,” the spokesman added. “Our team is in touch with them and others across the country as Speaker Johnson works to recruit strong conservatives who can win, help us grow our majority, and help us deliver on our agenda.”

In other words, Johnson’s camp argues that he is doing what leaders always do: investing in candidates who can defend or flip seats — many of whom happen to be women this year.

Structure, culture, and what a Speaker can control

Part of the tension turns on what a Speaker can and cannot control. In the House GOP, many leadership posts and committee chairmanships are chosen by internal elections, not hand-picked by the Speaker. That means even a leader who wanted to dramatically increase the number of women in top jobs would have only limited authority to do so.

At the same time, Johnson does have unilateral power in some areas. He can appoint members to certain select committees, decide who sits on task forces, and create new roles or working groups. He also sets the tone: whose phone calls are returned quickly, who is brought into sensitive discussions early, who is encouraged to take point on messaging or negotiations.

That informal power is precisely what some women say they feel excluded from. They describe watching a familiar pattern: leadership teams including the same few senior men, with women invited in only after decisions are largely settled. That perception — even if leadership believes it is unfair — can be corrosive.

A political and electoral risk

As Republicans look ahead to 2026 and beyond, party strategists warn that alienating women inside the conference carries a broader risk: weakening the party’s appeal among women voters outside Washington.

Republicans have made gains among working-class and rural women, but they continue to struggle with college-educated suburban women — a pivotal bloc in swing districts. Having a visible, empowered group of Republican women in Congress can help counter the caricature of a party run exclusively by and for men.

If that cohort is shrinking, or if its members feel compelled to pick public fights with their own Speaker to be heard, it complicates that effort.

Some Republicans shrug this off, arguing that internal debates are healthy and that Johnson is facing what any leader would face in a closely divided chamber. Others see a warning light on the dashboard — a signal that the conference’s internal culture still hasn’t caught up with the changing face of its own voters.

The test ahead

For now, Johnson retains the gavel, and most GOP women are not calling for his ouster. Many still say they like him personally and respect his faith and low-key style. Luna, even as she moved her discharge petition, has made a point of saying she still supports the Speaker. Others emphasize that the core disagreements are about pace, priorities and process — not about ideology.

But the small rebellions of this summer and fall have exposed something real: a sense among some Republican women that they must fight harder inside their own party than they should have to, simply to be treated as full partners.

Whether that becomes a short-lived flare-up or a lasting fracture will depend on what happens next:

Will Johnson bring more women into his inner circle on major decisions?

Will he back women for open gavels and high-profile posts when those opportunities arise?

Will women who are currently eyeing the exits see enough change to reconsider — or will they leave, taking their experience and influence with them?

For Johnson, the answer will help determine not only his relationship with an important segment of his conference, but also how history judges his speakership. For House Republican women, it may shape whether the next Congress includes more of them, or fewer.

And for voters watching from afar, it may offer a glimpse into a deeper question: whether a party that wants to govern a diverse country is prepared to fully empower the diverse voices it already has in its own ranks.